attempts of bringing the interface up were hopeless. Rebooting the server
eventually solved the problem.
I had users setting up (by mistake) their IP address = my server's in the past, but
this has never happened before.
Thank you in advance,
veedee,
C7 Campus Network System Administ
#x27;m running FreeBSD 4.3 on this box and I have
about 400 workstations on my "neck".
Thanks in advance,
Radu Bogdan Rusu (aka veedee)
C7 Campus Network System Administrator
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
= none
trap number = 12
panic : page fault
syncing disks... 15 15 11 2
done
uptime 6m6s
Automatic reboot in 15 seconds - press a key on the console to abort
-
:((
Cheers,
Radu Bogdan Rusu (aka veedee)
C7 Campus Network System Administrator
On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 04:21:41
nly), but I can't connect
from 172.27.40.133 to 172.27.1.5 (to any port) although the ping works. :(
Dunno what more to say... does anyone have any ideas? Have I forgotten
something or is ipnat dumber than natd?
Thanks in advance,
Radu Bogdan Rusu (aka veedee)
C7 Campus Network System Administrator
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
t_enable="YES"
> >ipnat_program="/sbin/ipnat -CF -f"
> >ipnat_rules="/etc/ipnat.rules"
> >ipmon_enable="YES"
> >ipmon_program="/sbin/ipmon"
> >ipmon_flags="-Ds"
> You only need the _enable variables here.
I know. I provided the output for you guys just in case ...
Best regards,
veedee.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
.y/32 -> 0/0", it worked.
All the best,
veedee.
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:18:08 +0100, Arjan de Vet wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>># allow everything to the another building
>>add allow ip from any to 172.27.40.0/23
>>add divert natd ip from any t
0/23 -> 0/0 proxy port ftp ftp/tcp
map xl0 from 172.27.0.0/23 to 172.27.40.0/23 -> 0/0
# NAT everything else
map xl0 from 172.27.0.0/23 to any -> x.x.x.x/32 proxy port ftp ftp/tcp
map xl0 from 172.27.0.0/23 to any -> x.x.x.x/32
-- eof --
Thank you for your time,
veedee.
> --
>
FTP transfers) worked. After switching to IPNAT it doesn't anymore..
veedee.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
t for some reason, I
find NATD to be a bit "better" than IPNAT (I'm having a lot of problems
with Audiogalaxy's satellite service running with ftp).
> This (in my mind) should greatly enhance the throughput of FreeBSD's NAT and
> keep those Linux people from bashing
it's safe to assume
it's not a National Semiconductor on it? I also found some references at
http://www.marvell.com/products/pcconn/yukon/88E8003.jsp... Yukon 88E8003.
That's what I found writen on the chipset also.
--
| Radu Bogdan 'veedee' Rusu
| NetSysAdm at campu
9a:46:9c
miibus0: on sk0
e1000phy0: on miibus0
e1000phy0: 1000baseTX-FDX, 100baseTX-FDX, 100baseTX, 10baseTX-FDX, 10baseTX, auto
Any ideas if sk will support polling anytime soon?
>
> Thanks,
>
> JK
Thanks for the quick reply.
--
| Radu Bogdan 'veedee' Rusu
| NetSys
saw a patch was floating around in the mailing list long time ago
> but I cannot find it any more. If it is really important for you, it
> shouldn't be hard to implement it.
Sure it is. Less CPU usage with polling on high "traffic". Ok, I'll try to
search for it.
pfilter/netinet/ip_nat.h
>
> The question is simple - which one should I change?
the last two. you need to recompile afterwards...
> regards,
> Andriy Korud
--
| Radu Bogdan 'veedee' Rusu
| NetSysAdm at campus dot utcluj dot ro
| Personal gallery at http:
love to see
> what the two together could do.
I was just about to ask the same question. We've just received 2 Athlon MPs
2400+ and we're about to buy a gigabit Intel PRO/1000MT Dual for one of our
servers.
It would be great if SMP could be combined with polling.
--
| Radu Bogdan
gt; You must be kidding. ;)
Agreed. NATd "crashes" with 400 clients on AMD Athlon 900Mhz. :( ipnat
works fine.
This raises a question... is there any point in still having natd? (don't
throw rocks at me please, I'm just asking). Or maybe it's still being used
for serv
aybe it's still being used
> > for servers with less clients to nat?
>
> Well for people using ipfw..
> if_nat requires ipfilter
>
> If it 'crashes' that sugests that a bug exists..
> anyone know what 'crashes' means?
nternet connection is 128kbit/s, it can cope with it nicely.
> > One day I will write the ng_nat(4) module.
>
> actually it can cope with a LOT more than that.. We see no degredation
> nating a 100Mb link.. (though not fully).
I got ~400 (was 400, now 450 this year) clients on an 100
nks,
>
> --eli
>
>
> >
> > Thanks all for you help,
> >
> > Andriy Korud
> >
> >
> > ___
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail
ss was discussed a
> lot in different russian-speaking mailinglists.
Can you please be more specific? What do you mean by buggy? I haven't
seen anything about that on the WWW, but then again, I do not speak russian
:(
> --
> Totus tuus, Glebius.
> GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Thanks.
19 matches
Mail list logo
